|
|
| Honda The Power of Dreams - Discussion about Honda and Honda automobiles. |
Welcome to the CleanMPG forums.
Some posts may describe situations which may in some cases be unsafe or illegal in some jurisdictions. Please use common sense and consult your local laws to make sure you do not hurt yourself or others or break any laws. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view discussions, articles and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support.
|
Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
 |
|

03-24-2008, 01:25 PM
|
 |
Beat The System
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Vehicles: 2009 Fit, 2004 Odyssey, 96 Civic retired
Location: Longview, TX
Posts: 12,782
|
|
|
Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
The Fit has been widely criticized as being geared too low. The result being it runs at high rpm at highway speed. Sometimes called a "buzz-bomb".
2007 Honda Fit
5th gear - 0.757
Final drive - 4.294
Then I looked up my 1996 Civic.
5th gear - 0.700
Final drive - 4.25
So this means I'm driving a buzz-bomb as well! The Fit's 1.5 engine has almost identical output to my 1.6 non-vtec, both in peak numbers / rpm and when comparing the dyno charts. They're also rated for the same mileage: 33 / 38.
It's not usually an issue for my normal driving - my routes are 55mph max. But on the interstate, where 70mph = 3200 rpm, HS-P&G becomes the only option for good mileage.
__________________
Andrew

----
100 mpg commute / 90.2 mpg tank = 1191 miles
Last edited by PaleMelanesian : 03-24-2008 at 02:05 PM.
|

03-24-2008, 01:36 PM
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Vehicles: 2000 Honda Insight 5MT, 2004 Toyota Prius
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 801
|
|
|
Re: Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
3k RPM is the Civic's favorite rpm for steady state FE.
The Fit has a shorter 5th gear and a shorter final makes the overall shorter than yours.
Fit: 55 mph = 2784 RPM, 70 mph = 3408 RPM
Civic DX: 55 mph = 2578 RPM, 70 mph = 3243 RPM
You're going roughly 5 mph faster at the same RPM.
I wouldn't call the DX transmission a buzz bomb at all. Try the CX/VX transmission, which is roughly the same as the Insight's...
Granted, I tossed the DX trans in my old Civic for an EX one... now *that* is a buzz bomb.
Don't even get me started on the DOHC B16 / 99-00 Civic SI 5th and final! Something like 4.5-4.7k rpm at 60 mph...
__________________
Ben
Best commute: 108.1mpg in / 99.7 mpg out
Best tank: 1034 mi / 86.7 mpg per FCD
|

03-24-2008, 01:41 PM
|
 |
Beat The System
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Vehicles: 2009 Fit, 2004 Odyssey, 96 Civic retired
Location: Longview, TX
Posts: 12,782
|
|
|
Re: Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
Ha! You're right. For the 96-00 series, I've probably got one of the best transmissions.
But why do they do this? If you want to run 4.5k rpm on the highway, you can always use 4th gear, right?!!!
__________________
Andrew

----
100 mpg commute / 90.2 mpg tank = 1191 miles
|

03-24-2008, 01:42 PM
|
 |
PZEV, there's nothing like it :)
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Vehicles: Accord, Ranger, and anything else ;)
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 42,657
|
|
|
Re: Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
Hi Andrew:
___Your DX might even be worse  The calc’s to find RPM at 60 include the diameter of the tires. The Fit w/ a stick uses 175/65/R15’s with a diameter of 23.0” (Circumference of 6.0214 ft.) and an RPM at 60 mph of 2,850
___The formula for R’s at a given mph as follows: [(mph) * (fifth gear ratio) * (final drive ratio) * (88)]/(tire circumference)
___Others of note …
07 Corolla w/ a stick: 2,305
07 Yaris w/ a stick: 2,660
08 Smart ForTwo: 2,857
___Good Luck
___Wayne
__________________
|

03-24-2008, 01:46 PM
|
 |
Beat The System
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Vehicles: 2009 Fit, 2004 Odyssey, 96 Civic retired
Location: Longview, TX
Posts: 12,782
|
|
|
Re: Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
Oooooh! Didn't think of that. I have 175/70/13's.
That 3200 at 70 is my observed actual rpm. Calc'd by your formula is 3093. About the difference I've observed between speedo / odo and reality.
__________________
Andrew

----
100 mpg commute / 90.2 mpg tank = 1191 miles
|

03-24-2008, 01:56 PM
|
 |
PZEV, there's nothing like it :)
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Vehicles: Accord, Ranger, and anything else ;)
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 42,657
|
|
|
Re: Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
Hi Andrew:
___You drive less of a buzz bomb than the current generation Fit …
My spread sheet pulled a 2,654 RPM at 60 mph for your DX w/ a stick:
Tire diameter of 22.6” (circumference of 5.91’) - 60 mph - fifth gear ratio of .700 - final drive of 4.25 yields 2,654 RPM.
___Good Luck
___Wayne
__________________
|

03-24-2008, 02:01 PM
|
 |
Beat The System
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Vehicles: 2009 Fit, 2004 Odyssey, 96 Civic retired
Location: Longview, TX
Posts: 12,782
|
|
|
Re: Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
That sounds about right. The point here is that Honda's ridiculous gear ratios is not a new problem.
It's not a terrible problem for me, given that I don't drive that fast. It also means that if I was to acquire a Fit, it would work for me in a similar way to what my civic does.
__________________
Andrew

----
100 mpg commute / 90.2 mpg tank = 1191 miles
|

03-24-2008, 05:44 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Vehicles: 2006 Honda Civic Si
Location: MA
Posts: 677
|
|
|
Re: Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
The point is "Honda's ridiculous gear ratios" has nothing to do with 0-60 times or quarter miles. Unless somebody thinks that a 1996 Civic DX was "tuned" by HoA for street racing.
-mr. bill
|

03-24-2008, 06:05 PM
|
 |
PZEV, there's nothing like it :)
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Vehicles: Accord, Ranger, and anything else ;)
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 42,657
|
|
|
Re: Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
Hi Mr. Bill:
___I sure wish I knew what it had to do with? Pulling a 1,000 # trailer at 60 mph possibly? Honda’s choice to run their smallest cars with relatively higher powered engines did not make any sense 3 years ago and it most certainly doesn’t make any sense today?
___Good Luck
___Wayne
__________________
|

03-24-2008, 06:29 PM
|
 |
Veteran
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Vehicles: 2008 Honda Fit Sport A5; 2000 Honda CRV A4; 2010 Prius III/Nav
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 1,813
|
|
|
Re: Gear ratios - 2007 Fit vs 1996 Civic
Just bought a 2008 Honda Fit with the 5AT for my wife. First trip out, 2 hours at 70mph cruise control was 35.2 mpg (new EPA 27/33). Return trip no cruise control with 9 mph head wind was 35.5 mpg (speed high 60's average with a little DWL). I was fairly pleased with that. Edit: 452 ft elevation change, downhill with cruise, uphill on return trip.
But the 5AT's RPM at 70 mph ran 2585 to 2615 almost all the time, and quiet as a mouse. This is substantially lower RPM than my Tacoma or CRV, I think.
So, is the MT geared lower than the AT?
I like the 5 speed auto. It can be flat towed and it goes into fuel cut on most every decel in gear. Has paddle shifters which I hope can help reduce RPM in town by bumping up early. Also, I can induce fuel cut and save brake wear by decel with the tranny when I cannot coast or am coming in hot to a stop.
Last edited by ksstathead : 03-24-2008 at 06:59 PM.
Reason: elevation added
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|